Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

sysusers prep patches #1763

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

cgwalters
Copy link
Member

A few bits extracted from #1679

This is easy to set in the environment for local development
and avoid leaking space in the success cases.
Will be used by the sysusers code to pass down a pipe that
the child writes to.
We should only be calling into GIO once we've set our preparatory
environment variables etc.  Not fixing anything today that I know
of, just noticed while looking at the code.
Copy link
Member

@jlebon jlebon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

None of the RPM packages I can find do this.

Hmm, just looking at the "a"s, I see:

abrt.spec:909:%dir %attr(0751, root, abrt) %{_localstatedir}/%{var_base_dir}/%{name}
amanda.spec:273:%attr(02770,%amanda_user,%amanda_group) %dir /var/log/amanda
amanda.spec:274:%attr(02770,%amanda_user,%amanda_group) %dir /var/log/amanda/amandad
amavisd-new.spec:200:%dir %attr(770,amavis,clamupdate) %{_localstatedir}/run/clamd.amavisd
asylum.spec:110:%attr(2755,root,games) %{_bindir}/%{name}
...

How does it conflict with the sysusers stuff?

@@ -1268,12 +1270,18 @@ rpmostree_compose_builtin_tree (int argc,
return FALSE;
gboolean changed;
if (!impl_install_tree (self, &changed, cancellable, error))
return FALSE;
{
self->failed = TRUE;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want this for rpmostree_compose_builtin_commit and rpmostree_compose_builtin_install too?

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member Author

How does it conflict with the sysusers stuff?

The problem is a system user with a differently named group; not a file owned by a different user and group. Which the current test conflates, but I think it would work to just drop the -g nrcgroup there too.

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Feb 22, 2019

The problem is a system user with a differently named group

Ahh gotcha.

but I think it would work to just drop the -g nrcgroup there too.

Yeah that's totally reasonable. I just didn't want to lose testing of user != group files.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member Author

Updated this one.

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Feb 25, 2019

@rh-atomic-bot r+ ac81cb0

@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link

⚡ Test exempted: pull fully rebased and already tested.

rh-atomic-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2019
Will be used by the sysusers code to pass down a pipe that
the child writes to.

Closes: #1763
Approved by: jlebon
rh-atomic-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2019
We should only be calling into GIO once we've set our preparatory
environment variables etc.  Not fixing anything today that I know
of, just noticed while looking at the code.

Closes: #1763
Approved by: jlebon
rh-atomic-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2019
Sysusers doesn't really support this, and no RPMs do it.

Closes: #1763
Approved by: jlebon
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants